From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/fault: speed up uffd-unit-test by 10x: rate-limit "MCE: Killing" logs
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 21:26:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240507192650.GJZjqAeipgUw2AoCK9@fat_crate.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240507022939.236896-1-jhubbard@nvidia.com>
On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 07:29:39PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> Generating lots of memory poisoning events seems like a valid use case,
> by which I mean that this is not just a testing artifact. And that's why
> the fix applies to the code that directly generates the output, rather
> than the selftest that triggers it.
Sorry, not taking a "fix" for something hypothetical.
If this is a real issue on a real system and the printing is the
*actual* problem at hand in a hw error storm sure, but no, not because
a selftest runs slower.
I'm pretty sure in a hw error storm scenario, printk being slow is the
least of your problems.
And in such a scenario the *last* thing you wanna do is ratelimit prints
so that you can't even get all the logs which is *the* thing you need to
debug the hw.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-07 19:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-07 2:29 John Hubbard
2024-05-07 8:13 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-05-07 16:28 ` John Hubbard
2024-05-07 16:43 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-05-07 16:53 ` John Hubbard
2024-05-07 16:55 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-05-07 18:08 ` Axel Rasmussen
2024-05-07 18:10 ` John Hubbard
2024-05-07 18:15 ` Axel Rasmussen
2024-05-07 22:49 ` John Hubbard
2024-05-07 19:26 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240507192650.GJZjqAeipgUw2AoCK9@fat_crate.local \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox